It appears that there have not been any crimes here, from what I've read. What is sad is Mr Adams did not learn from Pres Clinton. It's not the sex, it's the lies.
He has lost the trust of many and the media is not going to stop until he resigns.
Posted by: patrick nyc | Jan 20, 2009 10:54:11 AM
Oh yes, lest we forget, a yearly date marks the exact transition to manhood. Jeez! what is the big deal?
Posted by: ty | Jan 20, 2009 10:57:30 AM
The guy turned 18 before they had a relationship, what's the big deal? I can see where the constituency will be disappointed with his lying about the relationship but if both parties were of the age of consent then this is a non-issue.
It's not as if the American people actually expect politicians to tell the truth. As a rule, they generally don't unless they're caught in some scandal (which this isn't) or the truth will somehow benefit them or their party. It's just politics as usual.
Posted by: JerzeeMike | Jan 20, 2009 11:04:36 AM
Big deal #1: He lied to our faces for 16 months about it.
Big deal #2: He just handed another huge club to bigots who say gays can't be trusted around kids. Those of us without his power and privilege will pay for that. Ready for a bill to ban gay adoption, Oregonians? We can call it Sam's Law.
Like the Republicans with Bush, though, some people will defend any depravity committed by their own "team."
Posted by: Mad John | Jan 20, 2009 11:06:51 AM
Hey Mad John:
18 year-olds are NOT kids anymore. 17 y/o's are NOT kids either. Relationships that span generations are incredibly common. I can understand why he lied because of the ridiculous amount of Gay Panic in our culture, but lighten up everyone...
An interesting sex life has never stopped anyone from being a fantastic politician or leader. Stop being such gigantic puritans!
Posted by: Assumed.Identity | Jan 20, 2009 11:23:57 AM
Sad to say, but I think Mad John is correct. When someone is caught in a lie they have been perpetuating for 16 months, it is very difficult to trust them.
I think both political parties should require ethics training before allowing anyone to run for office.
Posted by: Voet | Jan 20, 2009 11:27:08 AM
Assumed Identity: You miss the point entirely. The problem is NOT the intergenerational relationship. The problem is 1) the lying and 2) the PERCEPTION of gays as predators, which Sam has now reinforced.
You and I may know the data doesn't back that up. That doesn't matter to the Liars for Jesus. They will beat all of us with the club he's given them.
Largest U.S. city to elect an openly gay mayor, and he can't make it a MONTH before a sex scandal with a teenager. Care to consider how that's going to play outside your progressive little bubble?
Posted by: Mad John | Jan 20, 2009 11:40:43 AM
At best this is a very unfortunate lack of judgement in another politician who thought he could get away with something. However, to those of you crying about how the conservatives will bang their drums...lest we forget about your own set of drums you bang. If this had been a Republican the cries of hypocrit would ring from every blog and gay publication.
This is the kind of bickering and bitching that has turned off many GLBTers to politics. Now the gay powers that be will make excuses for this and make it seem like not a big deal. Perhaps a little sef policing within the gay community and holding these people accountable for thei actions.
When that sleeze ball from NJ outed himself he was embraced by the powers that be in the GLBT community as being "courageous" to come out. Anyone who said "wait a minute"...is this really someone we want to edify?...was labeled a bigot or a homophobe.
The gay community needs to grow a set and realize that everything is not okay all the time. There is such a thing as being appropriate in behavior as a politician and a pass will not be given just because you sleep with the same sex.
Posted by: scott | Jan 20, 2009 12:10:35 PM
The lie is the tip of the iceberg. I am a gay man, I can understand an older/younger relationship. I am 20 years younger than my partner and we have been together 20 years as of last December 4th.
But now that the lies have been uncovered, how deep do they go. How can the public trust that the man didn't lie about when they first had sexual relations? I am well aware that the magical mark of the 18th birthday does not make a man, except in one very important aspect: THE LAW. I say this should apply to all people, gay or straight!
Posted by: bsmart2 | Jan 20, 2009 12:18:24 PM
So I suppose "intergenerational relationship" is the new PC term for what most people call "creepy old man with his new boytoy"?
Posted by: Dan | Jan 20, 2009 12:21:01 PM
let me agree with and amend mad john's posts, both of them. not only are they true, but there are additional matters which cannot be ignored, and they have NOTHING to do sexual orientation, OR emplyment status.
first, by oregon existing statute, the age of consent begins at 18. agree or not, it is the LAW. unless there was NO physical opportunity, it beggars belief that sexual contact did not likely to occur.
beyond the legal there is the morel. intergenerational amorous relations are not in themelves immoral, but once a mentor, teacher or counselor relationship is established it is a breach of faith and moral practice to abuse it by allowing a sexual relationship to develop, regardless of the direction from which it is initiated. when a youngster comes to us for assistance or support, we are morally obligated NOT to usher them to our sheets. this is not what they deserve, nor is it what they need.
Let's not have the OJ effect -- to rally around someone because of a sense of sameness.
If what the Mayor is saying is true - then he should have stood by the decisions he made to have a sex with a consenting adult. He should have stood up and said - I've broken no laws. Don't see crime where crime doesn't exist -- and risked losing the election. While he didn't commit a crime (assuming he didn't) - he put his PERSONAL ambitions before the realities of being a gay political figure and the realities - often tenuous - that come with that...
He still has a chance to survive this -- in time and by political record. But he shouldn't have lied about it.
If he wanted to fight -- an evil fear mongering political opponent he should have done so with his head held high and with the dignity that the office warrants - firstly. And secondly - he must be aware that he is a PR figure for the LGBT community - and while he has no responsibility officially - it's just so disappointing that he was chicken shit.
Posted by: PERSPECTIVE | Jan 20, 2009 12:46:57 PM
Let's bottomline this...
If Mr. Breedlove was 18+ when something physical happened, it's a little creepy but should blow over in a few weeks.
If Mr. Breedlove wasn't 18+ when something physical happened, Mr. Adams is guilty of statutory rape and, at a minimum, should resign immediately.
Pretty stark difference, admittedly. Some people might yammer on about 'age dont mean a thang' but get real. The law is the law. A 40 year old sleeping with a (barely) 18 year old will raise eyebrows.
And come on... I've got to question the sanity of any politician who would seriously endanger his career (and face possible felony charges) just to score some tail. I've had jailbait come my way plenty of times, and so far have managed to steer them towards somebody more age-appropriate. Apparently I've got more self-control than the first openly gay mayor of a major city.
Posted by: Dan | Jan 20, 2009 12:58:06 PM
it's so funny to watch all the gays snicker at all the older men with their "young men" even in P-Town. I think 99.9% of politicians, no matter their party affiliation are creeps.
Posted by: sammy | Jan 20, 2009 1:24:07 PM
I have never been able to understand why any adult could possibly have anything in common with a teenager, except for the physical. I have not been interested in a teenager since I was a teenager. However, I certainly can't say much about the generation difference. I am 17 years younger than my partner. We've been together for over 20 years. Yes, we did hear the sugar daddy comments. The problem is that I am the one with the big income. Oh, I was definitly legal when we met.
Posted by: Mike in the Tundra | Jan 20, 2009 1:41:41 PM
Anyone in any position of authority knows that it's unethical to have a relationship with someone that works for you. Double fucking stupid for people in the public eye. Thanks buddy for giving us another bad name. Fucking stupid asshole.
Posted by: Joe | Jan 20, 2009 1:44:31 PM
Dammit! When will politicians that have skeletons in the closet learn to either be up front or not run for office? This later 'discovery' of indiscretions is getting VERY tired.
I don't think that he should have to leave office or be forced out, but he really needs to work hard to regain people's trust.
And to all the bigots trying to use this to force him out of office, you need to get a fucking life and allow him to do what he needs to do to run the city.
He was elected as mayor, let him do his job!
Posted by: CK | Jan 20, 2009 2:04:57 PM
While the relationship may technically have complied with the letter of the law - if they mayor is indeed telling the truth this time - it is still flirting uncomfortably with the wrong side of the spirit of the law.
Add to the mix that the young man was an employee, and the whole affair smacks of a shocking lack of judgment on the part of an elected official. And yes, he is held to a higher standard than, say, the back room at the Mineshaft.
Legal age of consent does not change the dynamic of the boss/employee or older/younger dynamic, no matter how much gay men are titillated by the situation.
This is real life, not a highschool bodice-ripping melodrama on an off-brand cable network.
Posted by: sfikus | Jan 20, 2009 2:08:41 PM
Mad John is right. But I'll add that the legality of the conduct is irrelevant. Perception is reality. People think gays are cruising for teens. This doesn't help! If he didn't touch him until he was 18, fine. He won't go to jail. But it's stupid, idiotic, and for many, depraved conduct. Damage is done.
SFIKUS is spot on.
Posted by: David T | Jan 20, 2009 2:53:46 PM
The only think I hate more than puritanical Americans who castigate any politician whose sex life includes anything more exciting than missionary position with the wife (husband) only Sundays are the politicians who lie about their sex lives.
Posted by: peterparker | Jan 20, 2009 3:54:30 PM
Ol' Sam was very ambitious for himself and a bit of a cutthroat politician. He intended to seek higher office. Good thing this gets aired out now instead of when he's in Federal office. That being said it was kinda cool having a young gay mayor managing the the city I work in. No, he didnt do us (gays or Portlanders/Oregonians)any favors by engauging in or lieing about this, but come on, this is Portland, Oregon. We will forgive him. Just might not reelect him.
Posted by: hoppybeer | Jan 20, 2009 5:07:40 PM
Mad john- I think there are about 70% more straight pervs than gay, including fathers that are boinking their underage daughters as we speak.
Lying about a private matter is to be expected. We need to cut this guy some slack until they can prove the criminal activity. BTW I had an older boyfriend when I was 17 and I loved every minute of it!
Posted by: ty | Jan 20, 2009 5:31:52 PM
At this point, it doesn't matter if Adams broke the law or not -- either way, it's pretty indefensible behavior for an elected official. Both the relationship and the lies surrounding it raise serious questions about Adams' judgement.
And sadly, regardless of the outcome, this just adds fuel to the fire for those who oppose equality; and make it that much harder for the next out LGBT person to run for any significant political post.